 |
| 71% of the milk sold nationwide | is flavored |
|
|
Next week at Sherwood Elementary our fearless Child Nutritional Services Director is stepping out on a limb and taking chocolate milk off the lunch line for six lunch services in a two-week pilot period. I'm expecting CNS will get some inquiries from parents concerned about their children not having access to calcium, protein and Vitamin D in milk. Some kids just won't drink white milk. Others prefer the sweet taste of chocolate milk. Many haven't tried white milk in years. The vast majority of students at our Spring Branch ISD campus choose chocolate milk.
The Truth about Sugar
The biggest problem with flavored milk? Added sugar. With
new studies linking excessive consumption of added sugar to food and especially beverages to metabolic syndrome, obesity, heart disease and obesity it's time school districts put student health above student preferences. I'm proud to say, SBISD is taking this chance.
Don't believe me when I mention a link between school lunches and increased risk for obesity? This NY Times article about a
study of one thousand sixth graders makes this same link. (Thanks to Bettina at
The Lunch Tray for the tip-off).
Is milk a necessary nutrient
Chocolate milk contains nutrients, that's true. But it also contains sugar, an
anti-nutrient. If a child is not drinking milk then dietary needs for calcium and protein need to be sought elsewhere. Vitamin D is best obtained from sunlight exposure versus the diet. Milk is not a
necessary nutrient. The reason Americans think it is? The Dairy Council's Got Milk and Raise Your Hand for Chocolate Milk campaign's reinforce a parent's concern that without milk their children won't get the calcium they need to build strong bones.
One million dollars was spent on the Raise Your Hand campaign. I doubt the "leafy green council" has budgets large enough to educate parents on the nutrition benefits and palatability of dark green calcium containing vegetables. As of 2005 the National Dairy Board and National Fluid Milk Board have spend
1.1 billion dollars on advertising diary products as essential nutrients. Associations, boards and councils that represent vegetable growers don't have that kind of budget.
In this
guest post for Cathy writer of the blog
A Life Less Sweet, I remind parents that calcium is available in other food sources. When parents, in fear of vitamin and mineral deficiencies for kids, offer "dessertified" essential nutrients, palates are trained to prefer sweetened foods. An opportunity to for kids to develop a taste for savory or unsweetened nutrient dense foods like plain milk, vegetables and unrefined whole grains is missed. We teach kids that if a food has a necessary nutrient in it, daily consumption of sugar is "healthy". Flavored yogurts and flavored whole-grain breakfast cereals all fall in this category. This could set kids up for a life long struggle with weight maintenance. For some kids the outcome is much worse. Severe health conditions like obesity, diabetes and heart disease result from this childhood habit of over-consumption of sweetened beverages.
Why aren't there more limits on junky food in schools?
Some food is distracting to the learning process. For example when a child decides to take the school lunch, buy 1-2 extra chocolate milks and add an a la carte cookie or two to that. He then guzzles milks, munches cookies, skips the hot food, fruit and vegetable sides and returns to class. From my observations, many of the youngest students eat very little of their food, drinking only juice for breakfast and chocolate milk for lunch. Those students are not set up for success in the classroom.
Sadly, most public school cafeterias have no way to prevent that type of lunch from being consumed by students. The current mind-set is "healthy foods are available in the cafeteria, and students need to learn to choose healthy options." That mind-set was captured here in a
Times article covering response to the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act.
"Principal Means thinks kids about to enter the real world need to learn how to make choices on their own — without the government breathing down their gullet."
I don't think offering students nourishing lunches that support academic success an example of nanny state or as Principal Means put it, the
government breathing down a child's gullet. Principals utilize dress codes, unexcused absence policies, discipline policies and academic benchmarks to enable kids to succeed at school. Why not limit the amount of junk in the carnival type food common many school food programs and classroom parties as an effort to support academic success?
Parents don't let students choose their bedtimes. Teachers don't let students choose how they will learn math, via computer games or instructor led lessons. Teachers may provide access to math computer games, but that access is limited. Instructor led lessons are prioritized. Administrators don't let kids choose what to wear, most schools enforce a dress code of some sort, knowing that some attire is distracting to the learning process.
Is the problem that most school board officials and administrators don't recognize the
link between diet and academic performance? Don't principals want more students who are able to
focus on school work thus scoring better on standards tests? Would more districts commit to making speedier more meaningful menu reform if the mindset were instead, a
nourished brain is a learning brain?
Setting students up for failure
I'm all for teaching kids to make healthy choices, but we set them up for failure when they are distracted by flavored milk and a la cart items. Nutrition education is essential to help kids make good choices. Education alone won't yield kids who are capable of making the right choices among so many unfavorable ones. Should we really expect students who are still developing decision making skills and learning responsibility to make the right choices in the cafeteria line?
Participation is King
Removing chocolate milk from the menu has health benefits, but budget detriments. Some studies have shown that milk consumption decreases when flavored milks are removed from the menu. Others show that when items preferred by students disappear from the lunch line, students stop buying and bring a lunch from home. Decreased participation in the lunch program equates to decreased revenue which makes an already strapped budget even tighter. Without an increase in participation, thus more revenue, some of the most meaningful menu changes such as sourcing more whole ingredient, additive-free products, increasing the availability of palatable fresh vegetables, and adding more scratch-made menu items can not be undertaken.
Call out to SBISD parents, staff and community
If you are a parent in SBISD and have an opinion about the removal or decreased availability of chocolate milk from the school lunch menu, please
leave a comment on this blog post (identifying yourself as an SBISD parent). You may comment anonymously. Then take a moment to forward to the URL to other SBISD parents, staff and community members asking them to weigh in on the no chocolate milk pilot.
If CNS knows the SBISD community has their back as they seriously consider implementing reduced offerings or elimination of flavored milk district wide, I'm confident they will find out-of-the-box solutions to address revenue shortfalls as a result of this menu improvement.
What do you think? Is it time students have a chance to develop a taste for unsweetened and low sugar foods and a better chance at success in the classroom?
This post is participating in
Fight Back Friday.